![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#21
| |||
| |||
|
|
Apparently the engines are sweet little alloy jobs good for putting in hovercrafts and the like. So if we see a Robin in a big rubber skirt, that will be yours then? |
#22
| |||
| |||
|
|
bongo rule <deeeenoregistrar (AT) hotmail (DOT) co.uk_> wrote in message news:tv6pg.15880$1g.13925 (AT) newsfe1-win (DOT) ntli.net... pity you need a bike license to drive one these days. I am not sure that you do. The original idea of the Robin was that it had 3 wheels and was kept under a particular weight (7cwt I think) so that it could be taxed as a motor tricycle rather than as a car, which saved a lot of money. A quirk in the regulations meant that you could then drive one if you didn't have a car licence, but you did have a full motorcycle licence. But you didn't *need* a bike licence. You always could, and I believe still can, drive one with a car licence. |
#23
| |||
| |||
|
|
There was a time when the phrase 'motor tricycle equipped with means of reversing' appeared to be the decider of what sort of licence you needed. Reverse gear = car licence, no reverse = motorcycle one. Probably not as simple as that these days, but I don't think I'll ever need to find out. Mind you, the OP probably thought that too ;-) |
#24
| |||
| |||
|
|
The message <e867s7$p2t$1 (AT) nntp (DOT) aioe.org from "R.N. Robinson" <ronrob (AT) frumiousbandersnatch (DOT) freeserve.co.uk contains these words: There was a time when the phrase 'motor tricycle equipped with means of reversing' appeared to be the decider of what sort of licence you needed. Reverse gear = car licence, no reverse = motorcycle one. Probably not as simple as that these days, but I don't think I'll ever need to find out. Mind you, the OP probably thought that too ;-) I also have a faint memory of reverse gear having some significance on trikes but can't recall what. Perhaps taxation class. I have just had a look at my driving licence. This particular scrap of paper dates from 1978 and in those days group C was "Any motor tricycle (other than an invalid carriage) weighing not more than 410kg unladen". There is no group for tricycles over the weight limit so I think group C must be there to give group D (Motor Bicycle) licence holders the opportunity to drive light trikes. |
#25
| |||
| |||
|
|
There was a time when the phrase 'motor tricycle equipped with means of reversing' appeared to be the decider of what sort of licence you needed. Reverse gear = car licence, no reverse = motorcycle one. Probably not as simple as that these days, but I don't think I'll ever need to find out. Mind you, the OP probably thought that too ;-) I also have a faint memory of reverse gear having some significance on trikes but can't recall what. Perhaps taxation class. |
#26
| |||
| |||
|
|
bongo rule <deeeenoregistrar (AT) hotmail (DOT) co.uk_> wrote in message news:tv6pg.15880$1g.13925 (AT) newsfe1-win (DOT) ntli.net... pity you need a bike license to drive one these days. I am not sure that you do. The original idea of the Robin was that it had 3 wheels and was kept under a particular weight (7cwt I think) so that it could be taxed as a motor tricycle rather than as a car, which saved a lot of money. A quirk in the regulations meant that you could then drive one if you didn't have a car licence, but you did have a full motorcycle licence. But you didn't *need* a bike licence. You always could, and I believe still can, drive one with a car licence. |
#27
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <313030303131343444A6B9CC03 (AT) nospam (DOT) zetnet.co.uk>, Roger <roger (AT) nospam (DOT) zetnet.co.uk> wrote: There was a time when the phrase 'motor tricycle equipped with means of reversing' appeared to be the decider of what sort of licence you needed. Reverse gear = car licence, no reverse = motorcycle one. Probably not as simple as that these days, but I don't think I'll ever need to find out. Mind you, the OP probably thought that too ;-) I also have a faint memory of reverse gear having some significance on trikes but can't recall what. Perhaps taxation class. As regards driving licence what Ron said. There were quite a few bubble cars without reverse so they could be driven on a motorcycle licence. Not sure about any Reliant, though, since many used Austin 7 mechanicals. Maybe early ones. |
#28
| |||
| |||
|
|
My dad's Berkely T60 lacked reverse, IIRC; they had blanking plates on many of these vehicles and of course had the reverse gear in the gearbox. Some (the Messerschmitt comes to mind but there were probably others) had a |
#29
| |||
| |||
|
|
Some (the Messerschmitt comes to mind but there were probably others) had a facility for running the engine backwards (you can do that with a 2-stroke if you retard the timing enough and spin it backwards). Then you had 4 reverse gears but no forwards! |
#30
| |||
| |||
|
|
As regards driving licence what Ron said. There were quite a few bubble cars without reverse so they could be driven on a motorcycle licence. Not sure about any Reliant, though, since many used Austin 7 mechanicals. Maybe early ones. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
| |